The External Action of the European Council: In search of a coherent and effective global role

The European Council, which summons the EUís heads of state and government, plays an essential role in determining the Unionís overall external strategy. In foreign policy, it is often described as an institution that assumes strategic leadership and offers political guidance. Yet the recent years of crises have highlighted its role as a key decision-making body. Some close observers even claim that it exercises a role as Ďcollective head of stateí. Others however suggest that the European Councilís impact is relatively limited, as it is merely responsible for rubber-stamping and formally upgrading documents produced at lower levels. How has the role of the European Council and its relationship with other key EU institutions in the field of external action developed in recent years? To what extent has it been able to provide leadership, and increase coherence and efficacy of the EUís external relations? What are the main challenges this institution is facing?

This roundtable is organised in collaboration with the Jean Monnet project SUMMIT which aims to contribute to the promotion of European Union studies by providing the latest research-based knowledge about the European Council. The idea of the SUMMIT roundtable series is to enable a debate with academics, practitioners and the general public on a European Council topic in selected European cities.

Speakers:

Wolfgang Wessels, Jean Monnet Professor, University of Cologne and Chairperson of the Trans European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA)

Eikka Kosonen, Ambassador, Former Permanent Representative of Finland to the EU and Former Head of the European Commission Representation to Finland

Comments:Linda Dieke, Project Manager, Studying the European Council (SUMMIT) Project, University of Cologne

Chair:Juha Jokela, Programme Director, the Finnish Institute of International Affairs

SUMMARY of the
roundtable

Juha Jokela - Programme Director for the European Union Research
Programme at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs

Dr Juha Jokela opened the discussion by
stressing how the roundtable brings together two strands of EU research. First
of all the Lisbon treaty has brought the European Council to a prominent role
as an EU institution. Secondly the developments in the EUís neighbourhood have highlighted
the European Councilís role in the EUís external action.

Wolfgang Wessels Ė
Jean Monnet Professor, University of Cologne and Chairperson of the Trans
European Policy Studies Association (TEPSA)

Professor Wolfgang Wessels remarked that the
European Council provides both a fascinating and frustrating object of research
for EU studies. According to Professor Wessels the European Council is a key
institution to understanding the EU. Ever since The Hague Summit of 1969 the
European Council has been instrumental in creating the direction and the
architecture for the EU. Thus the European Council should be seen as a
constitutional architect of the EU. This can be seen for example in the role
the European Council played in the creation of the Lisbon treaty. The European
Council is also an important policy making forum since it makes key decisions
that are then implemented by other institutions. According to Professor Wessels,
even though the European Council should not hold legislative powers according
to the EU treaties Ė this is not the case in reality. Thus one cannot
understand the functioning of the European Union without understanding the role
of the European Council.

Looking at the European Councilís role in the EUís
external action, Professor Wessels noted
the way in which the European Council through the external economic relations
and the CFSP is linking the intergovernmental and the community pillars of the
EU. However, the European Council is less active in the field of external
relations than in other areas such as the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) or the
Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). This is especially due to the prominent role
of the member states in the EUís external action and the differing foreign
policy priorities of the member states.

Regarding the record of the European Council so
far, Professor Wessels considered the way in which the European Council has
taken several important steps with regard to external action from The Hague
Summit in the 1960s up until the Lisbon treaty. Although the European Council
was the important constitutional architect in the EU it remained an intergovernmental
forum. The EUís Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) is subject to
specific rules and procedures and the Court of Justice of the European Union
(CJEU) should not have power over these arrangements. These arrangements should
also not have an effect on the national foreign policy.

Professor Wessels stated that the European Council
should set targets for both pillars of the EUís external action. At the moment
the high representative has the two pillars under her control. The CFSP and the
other policies like trade remain distinct from one another. There are at the
moment two ways of dealing with the External Action. The European Council has
not succeeded in breaching the two pillars.

According to Professor Wessels the European
Council wanted to be the voice and face of the EU. This was shown for example
by the way in which the European Council was making a lot of declarations about
the direction of the European Union.
However there has been some confusion in the external representation of
the European Union. For example in the G20 meetings the EU is represented by
the President of the Commission and the President of the European Council. Thus
both the community and intergovernmental dimensions are present.

Regarding the role of the European Council in
crisis management, Professor Wessels took note of the often repeated claim that
the European Union leaders should manage the crises of the Union. However the
European Council has often been hesitant to take action. This was seen by the
reactions to crises in Libya, Iraq and Syria. The crisis in Ukraine has also
been a divisive issue. In addition, some issues like questions of defense
policy have been taboo at the European Council. Neither foreign policy nor defence
policy has been high on the agenda.

Within the European Council one can also see
distinct cleavages between different groups of countries. These cleavages
include the differences between large and small member states, eastern vs.
southern external relations, NATO-members vs. non-aligned members etc. There
are also differences between the leading countries of the EU Ė Germany, France
and the UK. France does not want to involve NATO in the external relations
whereas Britain is willing to involve NATO closely in this area and Germany has
been largely passive. Like in many other fields of integration, the
Franco-German engine has been instrumental also in terms of external relations.
This is due to the fact that these two countries embody the differing interests
of other member states. When they disagree then they function as an engine of
integration.

Another argument that has often been put
forward in the debate about the European Council is that the EC works because
there is the so called big brother in the United States. This has given the
European Council the ability to try and create its own policies in terms of
monetary policy and external relations.

Eikka Kosonen - A
Former Permanent Representative of Finland to the EU and Former Head of the
European Commission Representation to Finland

In his remarks, Mr Eikka Kosonen offered
several observations about the role of the European Council in the EUís
external relations. First of all, he stated that the question should be seen in
the wider perspective of European integration that has so far been a
fascinating story. The present political cooperation can lead to deeper
integration if that is wished.

According to Ambassador Kosonen, the European
Council has taken several steps forward and it has placed more emphasis on
external action. This has been a historical success story. One of the key
issues here is that this success story has come to a point where the member
states are going very close to crucial questions of their sovereignty.

The several crises that the EU has faced have
resulted in a heightened role of the European Council as a troubleshooter.

Ambassador Kosonenís main argument was that if
the EU is to have a coherent external action policy it can be developed only by
the European Council. This is due to the fact that the European Council is the
place where the central issue areas of European integration meet. This body is
the final body which means the questions canít be taken to any higher levels of
decision-making. The heads of state or government have to deal with the crucial
questions and to face both public and political scrutiny on what the EU is
doing. They have to convince the central players at home that the European
Union is the body they should address.

The importance of the European Council is
highlighted by the rising Euroscepticism in European countries. At the same
time, smaller member states fear that they are losing their voice in the EU
while the larger member states feel restricted by the EU.

According to Ambassador Kosonen, the future of
the European Union will depend on several things. First of all, international
events like the Paris terror attacks and the interpretation of these events
will shape the agenda of the European Council. Defence issues are likely to be
more prominent on the agenda of the European Council. The public opinion will
also have an impact on the results of the European integration.

The bottom line is that good results depend on
political will. However, major treaty changes are not timely at the moment.
Coming back to the EUís external action, it should be noted that it offers more
opportunities than threats.

Linda Dieke - Project Manager, Studying the
European Council (SUMMIT) Project, University of Cologne

In her comments on the previous speakers, Ms
Linda Dieke offered some criticism of them. First of all she stressed that at
the moment the European Council is much less focused on any long-termplanning
than on short-term crisis management. Most of the recent meetings of the
European Council have dealt with crisis management. There has been some
strategic planning, for example in the June 2015 European Council on Common
Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) and the EUís Global Strategy but these are
not central.

The foreign policy topics take a lot of the
attention of the European Council Ė however it remains unclear what is the
added value of the crisis meeting of the European Council. The Foreign Affairs
Council is still the central body dealing with external relations. Ms Dieke also
noted that after the European Council meetings, there are always different
statements coming from the heads of state or government of the European Union.
At the European Council, the Heads of State or Government are also informed by
28 different services, which leads to quite a lot of chaos in terms of forming
a coherent understanding of the situation.

The European Council has not been able to reach
consensus in the field of external action. According to Ms Dieke, there seems
to be a mismatch between the tasks and the expectations from the European
Council and its real capabilities to actually respond to these demands.